Thursday, January 20, 2022

Word Games


Helping one of my granddaughters with long division the other day, I compared what we were doing to the physical exercise her brother was pursuing with a passion out front — shooting basketballs.

She looked out at him with a thoughtful gaze.

“Grandpa, I feel like my mind is dribbling around in here until it can find the right answer.”

Good word choice.

Any neurologist will tell you that it’s good to play word and number games, not just for kids but most especially as you age to help fend off premature dementia. I’m not suggesting this is a solution to that complicated problem but medical opinion seems to generally hold that games like Scrabble can help.

Two of my sons have waged a long-term competition via Words with Friends that has lasted years. Slowly the younger is catching up to the older in win percentage.

But the rage with words online at present is Wordle, which a software engineer in Brooklyn named Josh Wardle created last November; by now it has become a daily habit for hundreds of thousands of people, including me.

The game, which occupies all of maybe three minutes a day, invites you to guess a five-letter word. You get six tries. After each guess, you discover which of the letters you’ve chosen are indeed part of the secret word and whether you’ve discovered their position in the word correctly yet.

So far I’ve been able to guess the word correctly the seven times I’ve played, usually by the forth try, though once I lucked out and got it on the third.

My only complaint is that I can only play this game once each day, whereas I can play robots in Scrabble multiple times each day, so for Mr. Wardle, should he read this, I have a request:

Expand the game to multiple words per day. After all, there are by most estimates 5,350-8,996 of those in English.

Or you could add words of various lengths. Then the choices approach the infinite.

THURSDAY’s HEADLINES:

  • Has the United States become ungovernable? (BBC)

  • The Senate’s Dangerous Inability to Protect Democracy (New Yorker)

 

No comments: